LEGITIMATE AND ILLEGITIMATE CHEATING

In what I am writing about - legitimate cheating, I suppose there is no better example than the sport of pole vaulting, sport much influenced by technology.  The legitimate cheating part is when a new technology is introduced legally when an old technology is still in use.  In the original competition the poles were of ash There was a time when bamboo, aluminum and fiberglass were all in use at the same time.  Probably the greatest pole vaulter of all time was Cornelius "Dutch" Warmerdam* who was the first vaulter to clear 15 ft or 4.57 m which he did 43 times using the bamboo pole.  His personal best was 15 ft 7-3/4 in. set in 1942 and not beaten until 1957 by Bob Gutowski using a metal pole.  Alas Warmerdam was not able to compete in the Olympics because of WW-II.   But everything changed with the introduction of the flexible fiber glass and carbon fiber pole.  It should be said that the fiberglass pole does have a metal core and the carbon fiber pole has both fiberglass and a metal core.  Actually for awhile the carbon fiber pole was actually illegal starting in 1972 but later was reinstated.**  The greatest of the fiber glass/carbon fiber pole vaulting was Sergei Bubka ** who set world records 17 times including the modern record of 6.14 m (20 ft 1-3/4 in.) in 1994 a record that still stands as of July 2012. Really the books should keep the records for ash,  bamboo, fiberglass, and carbon fiber poles.  From an ordinary persons standpoint, the modern fiberglass and carbon fiber poles will not bend.  One reporter spent a day with coaching, to use the carbon fiber pole and wrote about how difficult it was to bend the pole.  He never even cleared 6 ft that day.  But for those who can do it they get a powerful spring up from the pole and are to some extent thrown over the bar.  Actually it is a different sport.

Most new records in athletics are due, at least in part, to technological advances.  There usually is a period during which some innovative participants use a new technology first and benefit from legitimate cheating.  And is it really correct to say that records set with the new technology better the old records?   Actually the new technology makes it a different sport.  Sometimes the technological advance is rejected after awhile such as the body suit in swimming,*** extra long handles and larger racquet faces in tennis, and, of course, the carbon fiber pole for awhile in the pole vault.  The croquet stance in professional golf putting made famous by Sam Snead was eventually outlawed for another example.  But new records are usually due more to technology than conditioning.

The big controversy in athletics, however, involves performance enhancing drugs.  An athlete can participate using new technology, knee braces, elbow braces, taped thighs, and other mechanical performance enhancements which are legitimate cheating, but taking performance enhancing drugs is held to be illegitimate cheating.  Perhaps the reason for this is that the mechanical paraphernalia are not held to harm your future health whereas drugs will.  But who is the better athlete, the one not waring knee braces, etc. or the one who does?

And women's sports are even more strange.  A person may look like a woman and even possibly bear children but might not be considered a woman because she has a high testosterone level in the level of males that is 7 to 30 nanomoles per liter of blood whereas most women have 3 nanomoles or somewhat less.**  Thus what is called women's sports is actually low level of testosterone sports.  But what if you are a male at the lower level of testosterone?  You just have to deal with it.  Maybe sports are not for you.  Women with complete androgen insensitivity (another male hormone) may compete in the Olympics.

Legitimate cheating is nowhere more prevalent than in the American tax code.   The wealthy have managed to skew things around so that unearned income receives nearly all the income tax breaks.  Thus certain dividends are qualified which means they are qualified for a tax rate of 15%.  Long-term capital gains on stocks held for over a year also qualify for the 15% rate; yet the only time a company benefits from stock holders is in the IPO or Original Public Offering.  After that trading stock is no different from any other sort of gambling, though some companies will be more profitable than others.  Perhaps the most egregious flaw in the tax code goes to hedge fund operators that may make several BILLION dollars in a year and still pay the 15% tax rate even thought they have no "skin" in the game (which means personal money).

Many companies strive toward legitimate cheating by becoming monopolies although the word monopoly has sort of a dirty connotation and is no longer in use.  One word to replace it is a "moat" which means difficult to enter (an example might be to build a new office building in Manhattan).  Another example is of the cartel OPEC that controls 46% of the world's oil and is therefore able to control the cost of oil to a large degree.  Sometimes monopolies are broken up by law, perhaps the most famous case being Standard Oil that was broken up in 1911.****  A more recent case was ATT broken up in 1984.****  Once broken up, it seems to be hard to keep the breakup permanent as subsequent mergers have reunited large pieces of the original company.  For example, SBC Communications, originally one of the Bell system of ATT, bought the surviving ATT in 2005 and kept the more famous ATT brand name.  Verizon Communications is the merger of the former Baby Bell, Bell Atlantic, NYNEX, and GTE and much more.****  Thus monopolies begin to reform.

There are cases where technological changes enter to even destroy a company with a wide moat, and ATT today is in such a case where landlines are not the only way to transmit communication but wireless has been added.

To the best of my knowledge there is no such thing as legitimate rape.  Statuatory rape may not be forceable, but it is still illegitimate.

Note added September 17, 20112: There apparently is confusion among Harvard undergraduates oveer what constitutes cheating! http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/15/opinion/the-long-legacy-of-cheating-at-harvard.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120915
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornelius_Warmerdam
**http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_vault, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Bubka
 ***http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/30/science/la-sci-olympics-gender-20120730
****http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/25/why-ban-full-body-olympics-swimsuits-a-scientist-explains-polyurethane.htm, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Oil, http://wps.aw.com/aw_carltonper_modernio_4/21/5566/1425000.cw/content/index.html, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verizon_Communications