2. 考研
  3. One of the bigger, nonpolitical stories of the summer has been the decision by Lance Armstrong to drop his fight to clear his na

One of the bigger, nonpolitical stories of the summer has been the decision by Lance Armstrong to drop his fight to clear his na

admin2015-03-25  49
问题     One of the bigger, nonpolitical stories of the summer has been the decision by Lance Armstrong to drop his fight to clear his name in proceedings before the U. S. Anti-Doping Agency which accuses him of using " banned blood transfusions, the blood booster EPO, testosterone and other drugs" to help win his record seven straight Tour de France titles. The affair is in many ways a tragic one, since Armstrong, a cancer survivor who is doing admirable charity work via his own foundation, has been one of the most beloved and admired athletes of recent times-certainly the only cyclist to break through to popular admiration in the United States.
    He was not regretful in announcing that he would no longer fight the charges that will lead to him being banned from the sport and stripped of his titles. He called the proceeding "an unconstitutional persecution" and said the process was "one-sided and unfair. " He did raise some legitimate questions about the process, and in particular about the lack of physical evidence and that belated nature of the proceedings, coming after his retirement and many years after the acts in question. But by all accounts the USADA had compiled overwhelming evidence of Armstrong’s infractions from among his own former teammates.
    The USADA is a non-government agency(although it does receive some money from the drug czar’s office)that is charged with policing our own athletic house. In other countries, the government is the primary culprit behind cheating and rule-bending to give national athletes a leg up on their competitors in the Olympics or other competitions. If the schemes of those athletes are exposed, it is inevitably done by the World Anti-Doping Agency or some other international body. There is scant hope of those countries policing themselves because they have a win-at-any-cost mentality and want to use international athletic glory to make up for the deficiencies of their country.
    The U. S. has a very different—and more admirable—ethos, inherited from Britain, which can be exemplified by the old chestnut, "It’s not whether you win or lose...". Of course we love winners—athletes like Lance Armstrong,but not to the extent that we will indulge in their cheating. It is very much to America’s credit that we are willing to police our own ranks and to mete out justice even to a beloved superstar athlete with vast resources to fight the charges against him.
    And it’s not as if our devotion to fair play hurts us in the end. After all, U. S. athletes—even without enjoying the benefits of state support for training, much less for rule-breaking—still won more medals than any other country at the London Olympics: 104.  
Why are "other countries" unwilling to police their athletes?
选项 A、Because their governments are the head to promote the schemes.
B、Because the World Anti-Doping Agency can expose their machinations.
C、Because they make great endeavor to cultivate the athletes.
D、Because they do not receive money from the drug czar’s office.
答案A
解析 推理判断题。根据题干关键词“other countries”可以定位至第三段。该段第二句表明，在其他国家，政府是作弊和破坏规则的元凶，在比赛中为运动员提供帮助，因此他们是不会自己监管自己的，故[A]正确。该段第三句表明，世界反兴奋剂机构可以揭露他们的诡计，但与这些国家不监管自己的运动员没有关系，故排除[B]；文中没有提及政府对运动员的培养，故排除[C]；文中只提及USADA接受禁毒办公室的一些经费，并没有提及其他国家的经费来源，故排除[D]。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/kyFRFFFM
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)