|
On April 07 2011 06:12 Lysenko wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2011 06:06 Moody wrote:
Now, The people voting "No" because take the drug if it is not prescribed to you is illegal, then... ok fine. But saying that anyone who is currently under the influence of any type of ADHD medication is not allowed to compete is a bit ridiculous. It's not ridiculous, it simply requires disqualifying those who are taking the medication even if under a doctor's care. Whether that's a good idea for a tournament to set such a rule depends on whether they're focused on preventing any performance enhancement or only illegal consumption of the drugs.
This. Or to inform competitors that they have to stop taking the drug for the period of time in which they wish to be competing. As I stated in an earlier post, its not like not getting your ADD meds puts you at a health risk, you're not going to die of heart failure, so I don't see why something which gives you an advantage (especially if you actually have sever ADD) should be tolerated.
Athletes using steroids for medical rehabilitation purposes still get DQ'd on drug tests.
|
On April 07 2011 06:28 vyyye wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2011 06:20 Treemonkeys wrote:On April 07 2011 05:57 Neo.NEt wrote:On April 07 2011 05:50 ShamTao wrote:
I'd be really hesitant to just write these types of drugs into the 'abuse' category. There are people who may really need them, so wouldn't that prove to be detrimental? Yes, the competition is serious and there's a lot on the line, but with ZERO evidence to support the claim that drugs like Adderall make you a better player, then this ENTIRE discussion is presenting the situation in a subjective societal view on drugs.
Please don't take everything at face value. At this moment, with no objective evidence, we have to give people the benefit of the doubt. I've taken adderall every day for the last 16 months and I am 99.99999999% certain you play better with adderall than without it. How much better? Who knows. It might just be .000001% but I can't imagine that you could do worse. Not exactly scientific evidence, but you'll just have to trust me. This is what everyone will feel if they take any drug that much. You play better when you feel comfortable and you take it so often that's how you feel comfortable. People will say the exact same thing about any drug from weed to alcohol to caffeine, they play better because that's how they are comfortable playing, it doesn't mean it objectively makes you a better player. There is no way for you to know with such a crude method such as trying yourself. I'd argue that you can tell if you're playing better. I know for a fact that if I play in the morning my mouse precision is absolute crap, I get tunnel vision and my left hand spams as fast as my grandma types (that's a lie, she types faster). After a cup of coffee my play significantly improves as I won't be as tired. Same idea with alcohol, while I can feel more comfortable playing I know that I'm playing shit. It is possible for one person to realize that he plays better while on X, though it's impossible for him to know if it's a placebo effect or not, because as you said it might just be that he's comfortable that way. I'm not sure what I'm even arguing here, guess I'm playing the devil's advocate and the essay I'm writing is really fucking boring.
So basically you are making decisions based on limited knowledge, ok right..
If you play better when ur not tired how bout not playing in the morning. What about at night? Do you play better on Adderall with no sleep and been playing 8-10 hours? There are way more variables and just cuz u try something once dosent mean u know anything about it. Like i said above, this thread should die immediately for how silly a discussion it is.
Caffiene is as much a drug as Adderall but its np right? Wanna test and see if Huk snorted a line of coke before he played? Comon man its SC2..
|
if you are asking if adderall should be allowed i say sure, as someone who was on adderall for a while i can say it won't help all that much it will help focus for maybe a game but then it would probably only cause people to focus on much smaller things than the big picture...if someone doesn't need drugs like that to focus then they won't help really at all and if someone does it will give them an even playing field...no problem with it
|
On April 07 2011 06:33 ShogunRuaFan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2011 06:28 vyyye wrote:On April 07 2011 06:20 Treemonkeys wrote:On April 07 2011 05:57 Neo.NEt wrote:On April 07 2011 05:50 ShamTao wrote:
I'd be really hesitant to just write these types of drugs into the 'abuse' category. There are people who may really need them, so wouldn't that prove to be detrimental? Yes, the competition is serious and there's a lot on the line, but with ZERO evidence to support the claim that drugs like Adderall make you a better player, then this ENTIRE discussion is presenting the situation in a subjective societal view on drugs.
Please don't take everything at face value. At this moment, with no objective evidence, we have to give people the benefit of the doubt. I've taken adderall every day for the last 16 months and I am 99.99999999% certain you play better with adderall than without it. How much better? Who knows. It might just be .000001% but I can't imagine that you could do worse. Not exactly scientific evidence, but you'll just have to trust me. This is what everyone will feel if they take any drug that much. You play better when you feel comfortable and you take it so often that's how you feel comfortable. People will say the exact same thing about any drug from weed to alcohol to caffeine, they play better because that's how they are comfortable playing, it doesn't mean it objectively makes you a better player. There is no way for you to know with such a crude method such as trying yourself. I'd argue that you can tell if you're playing better. I know for a fact that if I play in the morning my mouse precision is absolute crap, I get tunnel vision and my left hand spams as fast as my grandma types (that's a lie, she types faster). After a cup of coffee my play significantly improves as I won't be as tired. Same idea with alcohol, while I can feel more comfortable playing I know that I'm playing shit. It is possible for one person to realize that he plays better while on X, though it's impossible for him to know if it's a placebo effect or not, because as you said it might just be that he's comfortable that way. I'm not sure what I'm even arguing here, guess I'm playing the devil's advocate and the essay I'm writing is really fucking boring. So basically you are making decisions based on limited knowledge, ok right.. If you play better when ur not tired how bout not playing in the morning. What about at night? Do you play better on Adderall with no sleep and been playing 8-10 hours? There are way more variables and just cuz u try something once dosent mean u know anything about it. Like i said above, this thread should die immediately for how silly a discussion it is. Caffiene is as much a drug as Adderall but its np right? Wanna test and see if Huk snorted a line of coke before he played? Comon man its SC2..
What are you on about? I never said anything about what X does when Y factors in, I simply stated that I know for a fact that I play SC2 worse when I'm tired, and I'm tired in the mornings. I'm not tired at night (or late evening) and that's generally when I play, because I'm more awake. How do other variables come into the picture? I gave the variables I used and described what effect I saw based on them.
And how does coke come into the picture? I'm sorry but I'm not quite understanding where you're going with this, though I could gather that you obviously disagreed with me. I can't really speak for adderall as I have never tried it, would like to say that.
|
The funny thing is this whole thread started on someones words being twisted (TT1) and on top of it most people are talking about illegal use of drugs.. which is an obvious thing that shouldn't be done but that hasnt stopped anyone in the past from doing similar things in similar situations (be it sports or school or w/e, if you read through the thread)
My point is if people need it they need it to be like a normal person. Telling them they have to make themselves worse to try participating in competitive sc2 is wrong and only gives an advantage to people who just happen to be better without it.
Personally I think most people commenting on this subject a) have no clue what they are talking about b) think that wikipedia is accurate and c) need to chill out on a drug that really has a low effectiveness in what people think it does in normal people.
Get informed before you voice your opinion please.
p.s close this useless thread.
|
If psychostimulant medications are allowed...
Whoever takes more stimpacks Adderall wins the GSL! Kas hwaiting!!
Jokes aside though, no. If the player has ADHD, sure, but if psychostimulants aren't allowed in competitive chess, why should they be allowed in competitive SC?
|
If you don't have a PHD in medicine you should not be discussing this because you do not know what you're talking about.
|
On April 07 2011 06:14 lettle wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2011 06:06 Moody wrote:On April 07 2011 05:57 REM.ca wrote:On April 07 2011 05:17 AJMcSpiffy wrote:
I'd want to see an actual comparison between playing ability with and without these drugs,. This. WTB double-blind placebo trial to see if effects of adderall on cognitive performance translates to game performance. And I'd hope to god the difference would be non-significant if only to encourage players to stop injesting the stuff. LoL!!! I dunno if you've ever taken any ADHD medication, but when the "double blind placebo trial" you're suggesting takes place, the people in the trial will know for damn sure that they're on the medication, and the people not on it will feel the same as they always do. While I was in college, I took enough aderal to kill Charlie Sheen during finals weeks. Let me assure you, there's no way to mistake placebo effect for the actual effect. Yeah man! Science? Fuck that, this guy has a story.
Double blind trials only work if it's truly a double blind. Have you ever taken any ADHD medication? Let me tell you what happens:
1.) Cotton mouth
2.) Dry eyes because you forget to blink
3.) Dry sinus cavity
4.) WIDE AWAKE
5.) Lose track of time / spend hours doing unimportant things
6.) When you come down, you feel like shit.
Now.. Can a placebo do all of these?
Please don't be a douche anymore on these forums... I know your other 27 posts are all probably extremely high quality and contribute to the community, but this one doesn't.
|
On April 07 2011 05:23 Treemonkeys wrote:
This needs to be cleared up. First they are giving very small controlled doses, it's not what you would compare to a typical kid trying to feel high. Second, they use it for extremely long missions where error from fatigue becomes a big risk so they try to balance it out with the drugs. It's used for long term endurance, not at all a quick performance pickup. If you are already alert and well rested or if you are dosing enough to feel a strong high the amphetamine can likely cause errors from hyperactivity.
More isn't necessarily better. Taking 60 mg of amphetamine to get high is always dangerous.
If you really want to get "high" from amphetamines, you smoke/inject them.
If you're in an MLG tournament playing 26 games in a day, you're telling me it's not a huge advantage to take 20 mg of adderall, maybe 10 mg more 6 hours later?
Even low doses of adderall are going to give mental stimulation and increase self esteem/confidence.
Go to any UC in California. All those kids tweak. And they tweak "under a doctor's supervision". All you have to do is go the campus doctor and fail their ADHD test. It's not hard.
|
On April 07 2011 06:28 dogmeatstew wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2011 06:12 Lysenko wrote:On April 07 2011 06:06 Moody wrote:
Now, The people voting "No" because take the drug if it is not prescribed to you is illegal, then... ok fine. But saying that anyone who is currently under the influence of any type of ADHD medication is not allowed to compete is a bit ridiculous. It's not ridiculous, it simply requires disqualifying those who are taking the medication even if under a doctor's care. Whether that's a good idea for a tournament to set such a rule depends on whether they're focused on preventing any performance enhancement or only illegal consumption of the drugs. This. Or to inform competitors that they have to stop taking the drug for the period of time in which they wish to be competing. As I stated in an earlier post, its not like not getting your ADD meds puts you at a health risk, you're not going to die of heart failure, so I don't see why something which gives you an advantage (especially if you actually have sever ADD) should be tolerated. Athletes using steroids for medical rehabilitation purposes still get DQ'd on drug tests.
So... You actually believe that someone who is prescribed a medication for a mental disorder should have to choose between competing in a video game, or taking their medication?
Your lack of logical thinking makes this debate impossible. I honestly feel like you're trolling right now.
|
On April 07 2011 07:00 Moody wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2011 06:28 dogmeatstew wrote:On April 07 2011 06:12 Lysenko wrote:On April 07 2011 06:06 Moody wrote:
Now, The people voting "No" because take the drug if it is not prescribed to you is illegal, then... ok fine. But saying that anyone who is currently under the influence of any type of ADHD medication is not allowed to compete is a bit ridiculous. It's not ridiculous, it simply requires disqualifying those who are taking the medication even if under a doctor's care. Whether that's a good idea for a tournament to set such a rule depends on whether they're focused on preventing any performance enhancement or only illegal consumption of the drugs. This. Or to inform competitors that they have to stop taking the drug for the period of time in which they wish to be competing. As I stated in an earlier post, its not like not getting your ADD meds puts you at a health risk, you're not going to die of heart failure, so I don't see why something which gives you an advantage (especially if you actually have sever ADD) should be tolerated. Athletes using steroids for medical rehabilitation purposes still get DQ'd on drug tests. So... You actually believe that someone who is prescribed a medication for a mental disorder should have to choose between competing in a video game, or taking their medication? Your lack of logical thinking makes this debate impossible. I honestly feel like you're trolling right now.
Depends if it's a legitimate diagnosis or not. Do you actually think someone who really suffers from ADHD can become a progamer without daily administration of said "medication".
What about the other 90% of people who are prescribed it to study or possibly kick ass at starcraft 2.
|
On April 07 2011 06:54 Moody wrote:
Double blind trials only work if it's truly a double blind. Have you ever taken any ADHD medication? Let me tell you what happens:
...
Now.. Can a placebo do all of these?
Placebo's have done some pretty crazy stuff in past tests so given that the test subjects on both sides of the double blind were both aware of these side effects its very possible that this symptoms could occur from a placebo, your brain is a messed up place.
Still though you're right that double blind trials are very difficult to preform on substances with physically perceivable effects.
On April 07 2011 06:44 sc14s wrote:
My point is if people need it they need it to be like a normal person. Telling them they have to make themselves worse to try participating in competitive sc2 is wrong and only gives an advantage to people who just happen to be better without it.
Well, are they not by this logic worse than a "normal person" at starcraft 2? Is it any more "wrong" to tell the person medically prescribed these drugs that they can't take even when it would give them a better chance to win that it is to tell the players who are good without the drugs that your opposition gets to stim up because he's not good at the game otherwise?
On April 07 2011 07:00 Moody wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2011 06:28 dogmeatstew wrote:On April 07 2011 06:12 Lysenko wrote:On April 07 2011 06:06 Moody wrote:
Now, The people voting "No" because take the drug if it is not prescribed to you is illegal, then... ok fine. But saying that anyone who is currently under the influence of any type of ADHD medication is not allowed to compete is a bit ridiculous. It's not ridiculous, it simply requires disqualifying those who are taking the medication even if under a doctor's care. Whether that's a good idea for a tournament to set such a rule depends on whether they're focused on preventing any performance enhancement or only illegal consumption of the drugs. This. Or to inform competitors that they have to stop taking the drug for the period of time in which they wish to be competing. As I stated in an earlier post, its not like not getting your ADD meds puts you at a health risk, you're not going to die of heart failure, so I don't see why something which gives you an advantage (especially if you actually have sever ADD) should be tolerated. Athletes using steroids for medical rehabilitation purposes still get DQ'd on drug tests. So... You actually believe that someone who is prescribed a medication for a mental disorder should have to choose between competing in a video game, or taking their medication? Your lack of logical thinking makes this debate impossible. I honestly feel like you're trolling right now.
That's exactly what I'm saying. If for any reason, medical or otherwise, you are mentally incapable of competing at this level without using substances which give you an advantage over your un-medicated state then you are simply genetically unqualified to be a professional gamer.
|
On April 07 2011 06:54 Moody wrote:
Double blind trials only work if it's truly a double blind. Have you ever taken any ADHD medication? Let me tell you what happens:
1.) Cotton mouth
2.) Dry eyes because you forget to blink
3.) Dry sinus cavity
4.) WIDE AWAKE
5.) Lose track of time / spend hours doing unimportant things
6.) When you come down, you feel like shit.
Now.. Can a placebo do all of these?
Please don't be a douche anymore on these forums... I know your other 27 posts are all probably extremely high quality and contribute to the community, but this one doesn't.
Thanks for pointing out that double blind trials are double blind only if they're truly truly double blind. Very insightful. Also very insightful in bringing up post counts. Way to move the discussion forward.
My post was a take on the saying 'the plural of anecdote is not data.' People want data before coming to conclusions. You said 'well I have this anecdote, that should be enough.' It's not. Sorry if you see it as me being a douche, you were just the butt of a joke.
As for your questions, no I've never been on ADHD medication. And yes, a placebo can do all of those things. The brain is quite fascinating in that regard.
|
I really doubt it would give an advantage. But I also don't think it should be allowed in a perfect world.
|
On April 07 2011 07:05 chonkyfire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2011 07:00 Moody wrote:On April 07 2011 06:28 dogmeatstew wrote:On April 07 2011 06:12 Lysenko wrote:On April 07 2011 06:06 Moody wrote:
Now, The people voting "No" because take the drug if it is not prescribed to you is illegal, then... ok fine. But saying that anyone who is currently under the influence of any type of ADHD medication is not allowed to compete is a bit ridiculous. It's not ridiculous, it simply requires disqualifying those who are taking the medication even if under a doctor's care. Whether that's a good idea for a tournament to set such a rule depends on whether they're focused on preventing any performance enhancement or only illegal consumption of the drugs. This. Or to inform competitors that they have to stop taking the drug for the period of time in which they wish to be competing. As I stated in an earlier post, its not like not getting your ADD meds puts you at a health risk, you're not going to die of heart failure, so I don't see why something which gives you an advantage (especially if you actually have sever ADD) should be tolerated. Athletes using steroids for medical rehabilitation purposes still get DQ'd on drug tests. So... You actually believe that someone who is prescribed a medication for a mental disorder should have to choose between competing in a video game, or taking their medication? Your lack of logical thinking makes this debate impossible. I honestly feel like you're trolling right now. Who's to say what a legit diagnosis is? The dr that prescribed it says it's legit. That's enough to make it legal, and that's enough for me. Depends if it's a legitimate diagnosis or not. Do you actually think someone who really suffers from ADHD can become a progamer without daily administration of said "medication". What about the other 90% of people who are prescribed it to study or possibly kick ass at starcraft 2.
Who's to say what a legit diagnosis is? The dr that prescribed it says it's legit. That's enough to make it legal, and that's enough for me.
|
The issue that bothers most people isn't that Adderall makes people with add/adhd "normal", but instead makes them much more focused than the average person. This then goes from a disadvantage to an advantage. If it merely leveled the playing field nobody would care, but it instead leads to a legitimate edge.
It's a long, long argument that I don't think can ever be answered completely or truly "fairly", but a line does have to be drawn at some point.
|
Uhm people are prescribed adderall for a reason, and i think its a bad policy to not allow people to use their medication. Steroids in sports is different, because athletes are not prescribed steroids, so its useless to compare the two.
Also your opinion in the opening post is very misleading. adderall can help you focus, but unless the players are taking way more than their supposed too (abusing) they aren't gonna go into their own little world. I take adderall and i dont really play any different then i do when i dont take it. In fact i would say i sometimes play worse, because i will focus more on one specific aspect of the game, like micro, and then forget i have to macro. Its probably easier to play starcraft with ADD, because of the number of things your attention needs to constantly shift between.
|
stimulant drugs do give an advantage and it was common to find top players popping pills or doing worse drugs before big match days at CPL and other big LANs. (Especially in Texas)
To think that a bunch of high school/college aged kids aren't going to abuse something so easy to get is pretty naive--especially when it can help out significantly on your focus or stamina for a long day of gaming.
on a Counter Strike team of 7 members.. statistics alone are gonna say there is a high probability someone on your team actually HAS a prescription.. they just bring a few extra pills on game day. There is no way to prevent this type of abuse unless you have a contract that covers it for a major gaming tournament or league(something that allows for drug testing for suspicion). The more sly way to enforce this would be less about "cheating and gaining and advantage" and more about "this is a drug free league and players cannot bring down the image of the league by using illegal substances."
I think it'd take a competition the size of GSL/NASL to really find a solution to it. However, having an "open bracket" really makes it even harder--
|
On April 07 2011 03:47 holy_war wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2011 02:52 Affluenza wrote:
What a crap topic...
Who cares? I wouldn't care if MC was coming into a booth with coke up his nose...
I watch SC2 for the matches...and if I happen to play someone on something which supposedly enhances their play...fair play to them...that's dedication. So if I apply your logic to sports (ie. Track and Field), if you compete against a track athlete who takes performance enhancing drugs, fair play to them because that is dedication? o.O If it really becomes a serious issue, I believe there has to be something done about it to ensure level playing field among all competitors.
Tbh I believe track athletes should be able to to take anything they want...I don't believe in this current system that doesn't allow athletes to push their limits and actually reach beyond their limits...
Atleast we'll be able to see who is the best athlete really is as I'm sure everyone will be taking the same stuff...thus level pegging for all...
You might say WTF...but for me I can see innovation and true human potential to achieve things if we just accept that drugs are a way of unlocking and going beyond ones own physical limitations.
Yeah it's radical...
Just to add...sports are ridiculous in this day and age...when ever anyone shows any sign of brilliance they are immediately accused of doing drugs etc...if everyone did drugs we wouldn't have people trying to lower sporting peoples achievements....look at Lance Armstrong the amount of BS hte man has to put up with because people are not happy seeing a human push the limits of what is possible...
|
This whole conversation is ridiculous because there's really nothing that can be done about it.
You think MLG is gonna take a piss test from every single player? Yeah right.
And then there are online tourney's like the TSL. Absolutely nothing tournament admins can do about it.
Whine all you want, but there's nothing that can be done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
