© Copyright – 2025 – Athletics Illustrated
The Enhanced Games have filed a lawsuit in New York this week against governing bodies. The suit names World Aquatics, USA Swimming and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). The organization is seeking damages and injunctive relief to halt what it determines to be an illegal campaign against the Games.
At least with WADA, its sole purpose is to keep sports clean; therefore, the so-called campaign can not be illegal.
President Aron D’Souza is either living in chaos or is inspired by Donald Trump’s games of distraction.
A baseless argument
The $800 million USD (€685m, £592.95) antitrust lawsuit argues that a rule adopted by Swiss-based World Aquatics threatens to ban athletes who compete in “sporting events that embrace the use of scientific advancements or other practices that may include prohibited substances and/or prohibited methods,” is illegal.
If D’Souza had a marketing notion, he would have named the event The Freedom Games, or something like that. But throwing the brand with the word “Enhanced” at the infrastructure that exists was a bad move. It is like slapping a pit bull retriever over the head with a raw steak.
According to the lawsuit, events sanctioned by World Aquatics in 2024 provided $7.1m (€6m, £5.6) in prize money to 319 swimmers. “In contrast, the 2026 Enhanced Games will have a potential prize purse of $7.5m (€6.4m, £5.5) for just a single day of competition,” the lawsuit claims.
Shades of when Grand Slam Track claimed to have $30 million USD (€25.67, £20.00). It did not, leaving athletes financially adrift; once bitten…
Perhaps the various governing bodies will turn around and sue the living daylights out of the Games and D’Souza.
Imagine several governing bodies managing their own sports, while WADA minds the anti-doping effort, and the Enhanced Games come along. The apparent premise was to undermine the efforts for clean sport on the notion of “giving in.” What an ignorant premise — and perhaps a false one. The Enhanced Games should have quietly gone about its business. Instead the organization decided that the legal entities are exercising an illegal campaign.
Shades of Donald Trump opening his mouth on any given day.
The nerve.
A false premise
D’Souza trumpeted to the Associated Press a piece of mindlessness.
“In contrast, the innovative startup encourages the use of performance-enhancing drugs to push human limits.”
“D’Souza said natural athletes are more than welcome to sign up for the Enhanced Games. But while the payouts may be tempting, the threat of being banned could be causing irreparable harm to our ability to sign athletes.”
“Athletes who are both natural and enhanced can compete at the Games. That’s part of the narrative that makes this interesting. Can a natural athlete beat an enhanced athlete?” D’Souza asked.
Not the premise he originally shared. At least not according to Damian Reilly’s article in The Spectator (Why the Enhanced Games won’t work, June 26, 2023). In the article, Reilly writes that D’Souza asks, “after years of oppression, why not just open up about it?” He says that anti-doping authorities are “stopping progress.” And that “performance enhancement, when used correctly, can have significant positive effects.”
So, which is it? Is the premise about whether an enhanced athlete can be bettered by a natural athlete? Or is the assertion about standing up to the man? Is this a scientific experiment or not?
What D’Souza is missing is complex. For example, even if identical twins competed, and one doped while one competed clean, the results may be different due to various factors. Psychology, effort, makeup of training, and the unique bodily responses to drugs. And which drugs? EPO, testosterone, stimulants, and combinations of drugs will have different effects on different people. How much in the way of doping, and how much per drug? What about FDA-approved versus those not recommended for human consumption? What about links to cancer, heart disease and other long-term concerns? What about immediate and catastrophic health events? Will insurance companies support the enhanced athletes?
Dangling the carrot of cash will make people do things that they would not ordinarily do.
Enhanced Games alleges that WADA et al are engaging in an “illegal campaign to crush the event.”
Yes, the anti-doping agency replied, “WADA stands by the firm position it has taken against this ill-conceived event.”
Illegal on what grounds? Illegal to carry out its sole purpose?
According to the article in the Guardian (Enhanced Games: audacious plan for sporting event without drug testing), D’Souza’s schtick is all about sticking it to the man.
“The IOC (International Olympic Committee) has effectively been a one-party state running the world of sport for 100 years,” D’Souza told AAP. “And now the opposition party is here. We are ready for a fight. I know they are going to play dirty. I know they are going to threaten us. But ultimately, we know that we are morally correct.”
That’s the leading of the argument.
D’Souza’s little games seem to be sucked hard into the vortex of chaos. And the deviations are reminiscent of Trump’s distraction techniques — a cacophony of noise.
