Martial Arts and Doping (the case of Sambo)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Today, the problem of doping is the most well-known negative phenomenon in modern sport, which has become widespread in response to its active commercialization. The majority of people would agree that doping issue has moral and ethical basis, therefore the educational component of anti-doping policies is most promising in achieving the desired result – doping-free sport. Research purpose. The study was aimed to investigate the peculiarities of the ideas sambo athletes may have about the problem of doping in modern sport. Materials and methods. The study involved 97 highly professional sambo athletes from 21 countries, namely Russia, Ukraine, Mexico, Japan, the USA, Canada, Cuba, Guatemala, Republic of Korea, Colombia, Paraguay, Venezuela, Peru, Brazil, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, Honduras, Uruguay, and Costa Rica. Results. A survey conducted among the professional sambo athletes, participants of the 2018 World Cup, made it possible to establish their knowledge about and their attitude to doping. It became known that 76.29% of the athletes were well familiar with the doping control procedure, while 23.71% were not. At the same time, 78.35% of the respondents believed that they knew their rights and responsibilities during the doping control procedure, and 21.65% of the athletes did not. 77.32% of the respondents knew the organizer of doping control and 22.68% did not. Conclusions. The analysis of the study results and WADA statistics give grounds to state that the problem of doping in modern athletes remains an urgent problem in professional sports, including sambo.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".