Game theory is gaming. We do not want to have athletes being robbed of their personal life and fundamental rights only to renew their national starting license. Such scenarios can be theoretically modeled, but in practice they have to stay outside of the lives of existing athletes. This is most probably consensus between most of all.
I suggest adding the role of customers of 2nd order into the model. It has been said before that the actors are of minor relevance in the great sports game, it's more about the spectators. The closest spectators, thus, must be part of the model.
Customers of 2nd order are professors and their groups in sport science who feed on real sports.
What is their role in driving doping to 3rd order? Where is DFG-funding?
I suggest adding the role of customers of 2nd order into the model. It has been said before that the actors are of minor relevance in the great sports game, it's more about the spectators. The closest spectators, thus, must be part of the model.
Customers of 2nd order are professors and their groups in sport science who feed on real sports.
What is their role in driving doping to 3rd order? Where is DFG-funding?